30 PM Debate: Promises

"So now, we will start our debate. Starting with our first topic, Promises."

As the debate started, the first chance for questioning was given to the newspaper Hindustan Times.

"Good morning Satyankar ji, Nehru ji. I have some questions regarding the borders and integration of India. Though it might be better to be included in Geopolitics section, but I think we can agree that it is important enough to be asked first.

Most of the Princely states have been merged into India already.

But the manifesto of BJS mentions that foreign bordering countries and neighbours, like Nepal, Bhutan, Burma, Ceylon, British Indian Ocean Territories near India, and Afghanistan. As for Burma, if it doesn't want to integrate, it is asked to return Manipur's land and coco islands.

But for the manifesto of congress, nothing of sorts is mentioned. Can both parties expand upon why so?"

Satyankar nodded, and started explaining the things that were mentioned in the manifesto to begin with, along with adding more explanation.

"While India itself has existed for more than 10,000 years, which includes all the areas within the countries mentioned, the country, India was only in the hands of the people since 1947.

Some of our neighbouring countries just got independence more or less at the same time as us, so they are in dangers that any new country might face. Like military coup, civil war, etc.

In Ceylon, well, I would like to call it by its original name, Lanka, there has been growing desire to declare only Sinhalese as the only official language. I can say that if a strong leader doesn't make sure that even in the future that Tamil will also be recognised as an official language, Civil War will happen. And once Civil War starts, it will take decades to settle, and millions will be killed.

Look at Chinese civil war and how much it lasted. And it was more or less capitalism vs communism thing, which many countries will undergo to civil war for it. Possibly Korea in the near future.

But language? They are far more personal for people than communism vs capitalism.

That's why, just divide the states based on majority language, no more than 50, and people will be calmer. It will also lead to administrative ease, and with learning a second standardised language for sfience will help things to be held together, and so that any person across the country can communicate with any other person. That's what India will do.

But if Lanka falls into a language war, joining india could help each party.

As for countries like Bhutan, Nepal, Afghanistan who have monarchy, they will continue being the monarchs, and rule the state instead of country.

As for Burma, it will just be a part of India like it was before British split it off.

As for the nearby British Indian territories, whether they decide to join India or become independent countrues, British will have to go. We don't want a barbaric British military base in the Indian Ocean. Not only the British created a puppet state out of our country, but also tried to supply arms to it, and tried to manipulate the West Asian countries to attack India. You would find that atleast 20-30% of the weapons used by the Arabian countries in the Israel-Arab war were provided by the British, and they was meant to attack us.

Anyway, the proposal to join India is more of a formality than anything else. The talks of Indian Subcontinent Union is already underway, so that we have a tighter association, whether it be economy, tourism, or military.

It's just that joining India will speed things up, and they won't get attacked by other countries. The Cold War has started between USSR and USA, currently the two biggest superpowers, and nuclear states. European countries won't be able to compete against them, but they will try.

And you have to understand, the Indian Subcontinent has been the richest region for as long as history goes. The Gupta Empire alone, which didn't even control all of India, held more than 1/4th of the world's GDP, and that's not even considering how much cheaper everything was in India in comparison to every country except China, which was comparable.

Missionaries, Jihadis, everything will be used to try to get the countries in this region under their control. We, with the help of tribals, have caught more than 10,000 missionaries in North Eastern region, trying to convert the tribals and cause riots to destabilise our country, despite the ban.

I don't exactly have the exact numbers, but many ran away to Burma. I doubt any country in the world doesn't know how dangerous the missionaries are. Look at the state of Goa.

India can ban them, why? Because of our population and power. If any Northern country tries to pressure us into allowing conversions, we simply won't trade with them. USA didn't say anything. Belgium did say about it, threatening us. And now, Belgium is in blacklist, and I doubt before 30-40 years the ban on Belgiums will be lifted. Arabs protested, but we don't need to listen to them anyway, since they would have declared war on us by now if not for hating Jews more than Hindus, Mosair, Ahmedias, Sufi and any other sect of Muslims than themselves.

But countries with less population and trade advantage can be threatened into allowing themselves to be infiltrated.

Countries like Nepal are strong, so they won't be captured. But it is different for Burma, Lanka, and Indian Ocean Islands that are under British control.

Even if they won't join, we will have the best relations with them, more so than USA and USSR. Because they are our neighbours.

But, we won't be readily available to go to war for them. Though in case the British or any country misinterprets my statement and tries to invade our neighbours, know that this isn't the India that is against its own people with just a little manipulation like it was in the past.

Don't dare touch the Indian Subcontinent. Play your World Domination somewhere else."

And now, the turn was for Nehru to tell the reason why there isn't any sort of promise on the manifesto. In the Constituent Assembly, he had been adamant against expansion, and banning missionaries and jihadis. But even with Congress having large amount of seats, they agreed to Satyankar more when he convinced them.

It is worth noting that Nehru isn't very influential in the Congress itself as Satyankar was. It was just that Sardar Patel is very old, and has gotten bedridden just before the election dates were declared. That's why the Congress party didn't have much choice but to chose him as the PM candidate.

Even then, he only got 59% votes in congress, and Satyankar got 98% votes in BJS for PM candidacy.

"I agree with Satyankar ji on many things. I even admire his boldness and resolve. If I were in his place when Pakistan attacked, I am not sure if I would have been able to retake it back within two days.

But, Satyankar ji is too bold and resolved. Too much of anything will hurt us. Especially trying to expand. India shouldn't have any ambition to expand after this, India is big and diverse enough.

India should avoid wars, and adopt a peaceful approach."

"Jawah ji, I must say this is very naive of you to say that. The borders of countries change with time. When USA got independence from Britain, it was smaller than the 1/10th of what it is now.

While it expanded through questionable means, India wouldn't. It wouldn't wipe out the culture and language of the countries that join it. It will even preserve their culture, language and religion from the pressure and conversion gangs of outsiders.

Regarding expansion, India won't expand one inch outside of the Indian Subcontinent.

And the expansion won't be with war. It will be to avoid war. Please tell me, why did Bengali, Gujarati, Tamil, Malayali, Bihari, and many stick together to form a country? Because strength is in unity. However different the culture and language of different parts of the Subcontinent may be, they are connected with each other.

It isn't right to alienate the Sinhali, Nepali, Afghani, Burmese, and others from the Indian unity. It is their choice to decide, considering pros and cons.

We shouldn't be the one to deny them to join, which is their right.

It isn't India not being peaceful. It is for peace.

Tell me why Britain is still holding our neighbouring islands? Because they need a place to attack us. Likewise, some other country will try to capture another country.

Don't tell me you don't know why and how colonialism happened? All wanted India's wealth. Every, single, coloniser came for India. But did they just kill, genocide, converte and rape in the present boundary of India? Lanka was one of the first country in the subcontinent that was captured. If at that time, the Vijaynagar and Candy Empires put aside their differences, and unite, would Lanka be captured?

Suppose Burma is going to undergo a military coup, would you as a PM undo it, since Burma is a 'foreign' country?"

"Burma is a capable country with capable leaders. I don't believe a coup will happen. You have to trust your neighbours."

"Nehru ji, just answer my question. If it happens, will you as a PM undo it?"

"... No. It will lead to war amongst our countries."

"I wouldn't too. Afterall, Burmese people are people of our subcontinent as well. A war between us will be disastrous for centuries to come.

That's why, I have given the fellow countries of our subcontinent a chance to unite, and become stronger and secure together.

But under you, Pakistan was created, when I and majority of my party's main leaders were arrested, just for power hungry puppets Jinnah and Muslim League.

You call it expansion, I call it unification. That is the difference."

"..."

"Next question please."

A reporter of another newspaper asker, "Satyankar ji, you have promised for states on the basis of languages, wouldn't it divide the people further? And Nehru Ji, you have called for instating Hindi as the national language. Wouldn't it cause instability in the country and more riots, now based on religion?

Satyankar ji, are you afraid of more riots because of this issue? Nehru ji, are you sure about this language imposition? Would it be any different than the British?"

This time, it was time for Nehru to answer first.

"Hindi, is the language spoken by most people in the country. Even if there are various dialects, Hindi can be understood by the majority. It's not an imposition. It is necessary to people across the country to be able to communicate with each other for the country's unity.

As Hindi can be understood by the most people, it is most efficient for the people who can't understand it to learn it as a second or third language in the schools. It's not like their language will disappear. Say, if there is a school in a region where most people speak Tamil, Tamil will be taught there. It's just that Hindi will also be taught.

It's not because we have some sort of majoritarian agenda. If Urdu was being understood the most, we would have gone for Urdu. If Tamil was understood the most, we would have gone for Tamil.

There is nothing to sacrifice, and nothing to imposition. The second language, Hindi, in the non-Hindi regions wouldn't be even graded in the finals. It will be there for just learning.

And regarding the states based on language, as the BJS party has proposed, will lead to a lot of divide in India. Afterall, there are more than a thousand languages. Even if they say that 50 states will be the maximum limit, people will protest for a state with their own language. How will that be contained?"

"Well, I will first answer Nehru ji's question. Chotu! Bring me the map and a pen!"

Chotu brought a pen and a map of India, and Satyankar started working on it. After a while, he showed it to the people.

"Actually, within our current borders, 37-38 states would actually be enough. You see, Bengal is this big region, then Gujarat, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Telangana, Andhra, Odia, Jharkhand, Chhattisgarh, Bihar, Punjab, Haryana, Baloch, Sindh, and some states will be enough.

Formation of a state will obviously have some requirements alongside language. Like area, population, borders, and a bunch of others. Its not like a language spoken by some thousand people will get a separate state.

Right now, with how the states are... For example, Maharashtra, it has majority of the people who speak Gujarati in the upper side, and Marathi on the lower side. Wouldn't it be difficult for the state to release the notices in both Gujarati and Marathi, every single time? Instead, the state will release anything in the state language and Indic. And the central government will release everything for each state official language, Indic, Hindi, and all the official languages.

While we have to inconvenience the least number of people, it shouldn't be as if they only have to learn a new language altogether while other part of country doesn't need to. That will be discrimination.

That's why, uniting language can be Indic. It can be everyone's second language. And it can standardise Science, which is very, very important.

This wouldn't divide the country. As our country respects every language. All languages have common mother an father. Maybe Sanskrit and Tamil come from a set of father and mother, that have no written proof because of how ancient they are, since they would predate the two languages?

Anyway, British Royal Family and its predecessors imposed a German language, English on their country. And they wiped out the language that the people spoke there before the German language was imposed on them. We have more than thousands of languages, and that makes us unique. We should preserve this uniqueness.

But as a country, we should also make efforts to be able to understand each other. That's why a second language that will be taught to every children.

Our generation has a lot of bad things. Stubbornness and lack of empathy to understand others, but our childrens must be living in a united country, where they can understand each other no matter what part of the country they belong to.

No one will ask you to learn any language. After growing up from being a kid, learning new languages becomes very difficult.

But a child doesn't need much effort to learn languages. So, let your kid learn two languages. They are perfectly capable of learning. Just look at any kid of parents who speak different languages. The kid can speak both easily.

Am I scared of riots, and that's why promoting state based on languages? No. If that were true, I would not try to make the second language compulsory for children, whose parents haven't ever heard of it.

Because, it is a language that has been just invented. Don't riot mindlessly, because it isn't for you. It is for the next generation, and you can't decide that they should not learn a second language.

Even if anyone protests or riots against it, even though they are not forced to learn anything, I, and my party won't budge. So rioting is useless. It will just make your child sad.

I stand by the Will of Fire. The next generation are the king. Even though we will struggle, make tough decisions, decisions that people may not like, we will do anything to give our next generation the best life. We will give the next generation the best base to build upon India's building.

Everyone should make it their motto. We love our kids, and want better future for them. So don't do things that will not allow them to have a better life than we had."

After that, some more questions were asked, mainly about why they made the promises, and why the other didn't, or did it differently.

"Now, we will move to our next topic, 'How to fulfill promises'".